AuthorTopic: Paul is Dead: Story & Clues (Read 106461 times)

The good thing about that site though is that it has compiled all the available 'clues' and just lets people decide for themselves.

By the way, I added your clues to my original post - hope you don't mind!

No, of course not, I'm flattered. One more thing, if I might: To those who argue the 28IF clue--yes, he'd have been 27, but 'Paul Is Dead' theorists counter that, in some Indian cultures, you are given an extra year for time spent in the womb, ergo 28 years old.

I read today that experts (not familiar with Paul's work) have taken a closer look at McCartney's paintings. He seems to use a lot of red paint. The experts thought it might have something to do with 'blood'. And of course, thinking further, they figured out that the painter might not be the one we think he is.Now, that's what we've got experts for...

New York's top art critics are refuelling the rock 'n' roll myth that PAUL McCARTNEY died over three decades ago - after taking a rare close-up view of his paintings.

Top Big Apple celebrity art expert BAIRD JONES staged a one-night exhibition of JOHN LENNON and McCartney art from his own personal collection at New York club Deep earlier this month (15SEP05) and was left stunned by the reactions of his "austere" friends.

A fan of McCartney's art for years, Jones admits it took the opinions of his critical pals to make him realise that the 'Paul is dead' rumours that started in the late 1960s could be true.

He explains, "There were lots of questions about why he (McCartney) predominantly uses the colour red in ways one would not. It's the colour of blood and death.

"The critics were asking questions like, 'Why is there so much red in the garden (painting) and on the beach (painting)? It's macabre.' Call it art psychoanalysis, but the 'Paul is dead' rumour has started to spread.

"These were highbrow, austere people who take their art seriously. Some had never really had the chance to see McCartney's art up close."

Jones now claims there are major clues in McCartney's art that suggest the rocker might not be what he seems to be.

He explains, "It's one more sign that this man is communicating something. Red has been a dominant colour of his for some time.

"It might be evidence that the Paul McCartney we think we know is not Paul McCartney; he's an imposter - and here's a signal."

The loveable Mop Top from the world's greatest group once penned "Can't Buy Me Love. No. No. No. Noooo" That may be true but he could of bought us a new f**king ground. When Macca is not creosoting his bird's leg or getting beaten at Twister by Lady McCartney-Mills, Sir Paul loves nothing more than sitting back, lighting up a spliff and watching old Everton DVD's. Paul may "..believe in Yesterday" but today's Blues team ain't half bad either!

The answer, James, is ambiguous at best. The Beatles were never regulars at either Anfield or Goodison Park - so it really depends on which titbit of folklore you choose to swallow.Let's keep it a mystery please. lol

Blimey, that is THE clue of the century - and it was SO glaringly obvious! I have just converted to Paulisdeadism!

I've noted elsewhere on the board that there's a famous picture of the Beatles, taken in 1962 or '63, with Paul holding a cigarette in his RIGHT hand. That means he was already dead in 1963! Now, how's that for a clue.